{"id":25669,"date":"2026-09-18T17:50:58","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T12:05:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=25669"},"modified":"2026-09-18T17:50:58","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T12:05:58","slug":"russia-says-it-has-no-intention-of-attacking-nato-warns-it-will-counter-security-threats","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eng.dragonmedia.com.np\/?p=25669","title":{"rendered":"Russia Says It Has No Intention of Attacking NATO, Warns It Will Counter Security Threats<\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Dragon Media News Desk<\/strong><\/p>\n

Russia has said it has no intention of attacking NATO member states but will take measures it considers necessary to protect its national security and counter threats emanating from the Western military alliance, as tensions between Moscow and NATO remain elevated.<\/p>\n

Responding to questions about growing strains within NATO, including disagreements over defence spending, the future US military presence in Europe and transatlantic burden-sharing, the Russian side described such disputes as an internal matter for the alliance. Moscow nevertheless argued that Washington was increasingly pressing European countries to devote greater resources to military expenditure.<\/p>\n

Russia also criticised NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s emphasis on expanding defence expenditure and weapons production. Moscow argued that accelerating militarisation was placing additional economic and social pressure on European countries. NATO presents the issue differently, maintaining that increased investment is necessary to strengthen deterrence, replenish military capabilities and respond to what the alliance identifies as a deteriorating security environment.<\/p>\n

For Moscow, the central issue is NATO’s continuing identification of Russia as a long-term threat to Euro-Atlantic security. At its July summit in Ankara, NATO leaders formally reaffirmed that assessment while committing to greater defence investment, expanded military production and enhanced capabilities across conventional, missile, cyber, space and other domains.<\/p>\n

Russia argues that NATO’s military planning and force development are increasingly structured around confrontation with Moscow. It maintains that the alliance has failed to address what Russia describes as the underlying causes of the European security crisis and has instead continued along a path of military expansion and confrontation.<\/p>\n

Moscow simultaneously rejected allegations linking Russia to sabotage, drone incidents and other suspected hybrid operations reported across Europe. Russian officials described accusations concerning such incidents as unsubstantiated and argued that they were being used to reinforce perceptions of a Russian threat and justify higher military expenditure.<\/p>\n

Several European governments and NATO officials, however, have accused Russia of conducting or supporting hybrid activities targeting European infrastructure and security. Moscow has repeatedly denied such allegations. The competing claims remain an important part of the wider confrontation between Russia and NATO, extending beyond the battlefield in Ukraine into intelligence, cyber security, infrastructure protection and information warfare.<\/p>\n

The Russian side also dismissed suggestions that Moscow was particularly concerned by European acquisition of US-made F-35 fighter aircraft. It argued that portraying Russia as an imminent military threat was being used partly to justify continued European purchases of expensive American weapons systems.<\/p>\n

The debate comes as NATO undergoes a significant transformation in defence spending and burden-sharing. At the Ankara summit, alliance members reaffirmed their commitment to collective defence under Article 5 and announced more than $50 billion in new procurement while expanding defence-industrial capacity. European allies and Canada are also assuming a larger share of conventional defence responsibilities.<\/p>\n

At the same time, questions surrounding Washington’s long-term military posture in Europe have generated uncertainty within the alliance. Despite political disagreements, the United States continues to maintain major military assets and infrastructure in Europe, while discussions over future troop deployments and Europe’s responsibility for its own defence remain active.<\/p>\n

The contrasting positions underline a widening security dilemma in Europe. NATO says stronger military capabilities are required to deter potential aggression, particularly from Russia. Moscow argues that the same military expansion creates additional threats to Russian security and intensifies confrontation. Russia’s latest statement therefore combines an assurance that it does not intend to attack NATO countries with a warning that it will respond to military developments it considers threatening to its national security.<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t <\/div><\/div>\n\t\t